Transcript: Questioning of the Panel By Representative James Sensenbrenner (D-WI)

House Judiciary Committee hearing, December 8, 1998

HYDE: Thank you very much, Mr. Owens.

Now we will have the questions from the members, and the
first questioner is Mr. Sensenbrenner.

SENSENBRENNER: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Holtzman, I believe that after you left Congress you
spent some time as district attorney in Brooklyn. Am I correct
in that?

HOLTZMAN: Yes, Mr. Sensenbrenner. I also had the pleasure
of serving with you in the United States Congress.

SENSENBRENNER: Yes, and I remember that very vividly.

Do you think that making false statement before a grand jury
is an impeachable offense?

HOLTZMAN: It could be, but it doesn't have to be.

SENSENBRENNER: What's the difference in your mind?

HOLTZMAN: What Mr. Owens so eloquently spoke to, which is
that, in my judgment, whether the conduct is reprehensible or
not, whether we find it extremely distasteful or not, the
standard for impeachment is the abuse of the power of office --
one that creates a serious danger to the operations of our
government and a threat to our democracy, which is what we saw
in Watergate.

SENSENBRENNER: Now, the last impeachment that was voted by
the House of Representatives was nine years ago in 1989.
And
there, the House of Representatives, unanimously 417-0 declared
that Judge Walter Nixon's false statements to the grand jury
about a private matter, which was a sweetheart oil and gas lease
deal, were impeachable offenses. And the Senate agreed with the
House's charge and kicked Judge Nixon out of office -- I believe
by a 91-8 vote.

Can you tell me what you think the difference is between
Judge Nixon's false statements to a grand jury about a private
oil and gas lease that did not have anything to do with
egregiously defrauding the government or changing the
constitutional balance of powers and Bill Clinton's false
statements, if they indeed were false statements, to the grand
jury about his relations with Monica Lewinsky?

HOLTZMAN: Mr. Sensenbrenner, I think that the members of
this committee can see and the country can see that there is a
huge difference between impeaching one federal judge and
removing -- because there are hundreds of federal judges -- and
removing the one president of the United States.

Obviously, the situation of removal of a president is so
grave because the president is voted upon. Judges, federal
judges, are not elected. You are undoing the majority vote of
the American people. That is central to our democratic system.
It is central to the stability of this nation.

We've survived as a democracy very well and the presidency
has been a central part of it.

But the second answer to your question, sir, is that judges
serve during good behavior, which is something that does not
apply to presidents. It's a constitutional standard. And so, I
think, it's quite different.

SENSENBRENNER: Let me say, I'm deeply concerned with that
answer -- because what you're saying is that the standard of
truthfulness for a president of the United States when
testifying before a grand jury is less than the standard of
truthfulness for a federal judge.

Now you and I will disagree with that conclusion. But I've
looked back and back in the record, as I'm sure all of us have.
And I pulled out your questioning of Gerald Ford when he was
before this committee having been nominated to be vice president
by President Nixon, who was still in office at the time.

And you talked to Mr. Ford about Nixon lying allegedly about
the bombing of Cambodia. Mr. Ford responded that he didn't
think that President Nixon had been 100 percent truthful on that
matter, and then insisted that all presidents had given some
false and deceptive statements. You then said there was a
difference between keeping a secret and falsifying information.

And you said, quote, "I think all of us understand that
difference very well." Could you tell us then, is there not a
major difference between historical falsehoods as opposed to
lies before a federal court proceeding or a grand jury?

HOLTZMAN: Mr. Sensenbrenner, I hate to answer a question
with a question. But don't you think there's an enormous
difference between keeping a dual set of books about bombing of
a foreign country without the authorization of Congress and not
telling the truth about a private sexual misconduct?

SENSENBRENNER: I think there should be no difference because
our perjury and false statements statutes, you know, do not have
various levels of perjury. When you do make a false statement,
you have to live by the consequences. And I think we all try to
teach our kids that one of the things they always should do is
always tell the truth.